Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 3, 2007 Share #1 Â Posted March 3, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well I got a product shoot to do and would like to use the M8 for it and looking at all my lenses it seem the closest focusing one is the 75mm lux which is pretty good but may not be enough for shooting for this one client which makes custom handguns and reloading equipment . So I maybe getting into the macro lens area. First i was wondering if there was some cheap solution to this , like close up filters or something of that nature. Now i see the 90 f4 elmar but it sounds like a normal lens without the Macro adapter. And sounds like you need the adapter to get close. Nowi could buy a 60macro used for the DMR and that maybe the cheapest route but if there was a way to do it with the M8 i would like to try. Â Thoughts on this and i can't even find a image of the adapter plus buying it used maybe tough Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted March 3, 2007 Share #2 Â Posted March 3, 2007 I got a 90/4 Macro for just that application. Without the Macro adapter because I think at that point you shouldn't be using an RF. I could'nt see myself remounting the lens and macro adapter when I wanted to use it's narrow range. What if you want to pull back a bit? Remount the whole gizmo again? I just wanted a lens corrected for near focus within what's practical for the M. Â The lens had backfocus. OK, no big deal, I had picked up a couple of used lenses for the M8 (50/1.4 preASPH + 21/2.8 preASPH). They were all backfocusing as well, so I was sending the whole kit to DAG for calibration. Well, my M8 RF was dead on the money. The 50 (50 was out a mile) and 21 got adjusted but the 90 he couldn't adjust. He said the mechanical bit was right on but because of the optical design he would not be able to adjust it. Rather then send it to Leica I just returned it. Â A used 60 MACRO, if you still have the R is cheaper then anything you could buy for the M. You could buy a DSLR and Macro lens for the price of the 90 and macro adapter and it's one of Leica's less expensive offerings. Can you not get close enough with the 50 ASPH? That's a killer lens for detail and resolution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsteve Posted March 3, 2007 Share #3 Â Posted March 3, 2007 Guy: Â Ask your Leica Rep to loan you one. Leica used to have a try before you buy program for just these cases. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveP Posted March 3, 2007 Share #4 Â Posted March 3, 2007 I think this is why the Visoflex was invented. But really, for macro work, if you have any DSLR, use it instead. Many normal lenses reversed (with a $15 ring) work very well for macro work on an SLR. Working with an RF may prove a point or be a personal challenge, but IMHO you are just making life hard for yourself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 3, 2007 Share #5 Â Posted March 3, 2007 I do like my personal challenges and I do want the M8 to be more complete in some ways . I did see one used for 1000 US which is not bad in silver. I could maybe get a loaner and that should be easy to do. How close does it focus without the adapter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 3, 2007 Share #6 Â Posted March 3, 2007 I have the 90/4 and macro adapter and in truth it's really just a curiosity. It works fine but for all the noise, it only takes you 30cm closer - to 50cm - than the lens by itself to a repro ratio of 3:1. Â A dSLR will offer much better ease of use and better lighting options. My standard for macro is my Nikon D2x with their 105/2.8 VR macro lens and macro flash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted March 3, 2007 Share #7 Â Posted March 3, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Guy, Â Having been a medical photographer many years ago, macro/micro photography is a topic with which I'm pretty familiar. At the risk of of committing heresy, I think both Nikon and Canon offer excellent cost-effective solutions for close-up work. The 100mm f2.8 Canon lens outperformed the 100 2.8 Zeiss lens I owned for my Contax RTS system -- and at only a quarter of the price. If you plan of doing a lot of shooting, a Leica macro lens might make sense, otherwise a Canon DSLR and a 100 will provide outstanding results. (I'm sure Nikon users can attest to the quality of their close-up optics.) I've always found that the shorter focal length macros (50s and 60s) created problems for lighting because of their closer working distance. Â As far as using the M8 is concerned, it may be fun to try, but it's simply the wrong tool for the job. Â Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 3, 2007 Share #8 Â Posted March 3, 2007 So 3-1 with the lens by itself. Leica 100 R is 2-1 and i think the 60 is the same. Yes Nikon is out since i have a DMR that would do it in a heart beat maybe getting a 60 macro at 500 bucks is really the best answer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted March 3, 2007 Share #9 Â Posted March 3, 2007 The 90/4 Macro only achieves 1:3 with the adapter: Â Leica Camera AG - Photography - LEICA MACRO-ELMAR-M 90 mm f/4 Â Guy, the best option by far is the Apo-100/2.8 Macro. Did you really sell yours? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 3, 2007 Share #10  Posted March 3, 2007 Guy, Having been a medical photographer many years ago, macro/micro photography is a topic with which I'm pretty familiar. At the risk of of committing heresy, I think both Nikon and Canon offer excellent cost-effective solutions for close-up work. The 100mm f2.8 Canon lens outperformed the 100 2.8 Zeiss lens I owned for my Contax RTS system -- and at only a quarter of the price. If you plan of doing a lot of shooting, a Leica macro lens might make sense, otherwise a Canon DSLR and a 100 will provide outstanding results. (I'm sure Nikon users can attest to the quality of their close-up optics.) I've always found that the shorter focal length macros (50s and 60s) created problems for lighting because of their closer working distance.  As far as using the M8 is concerned, it may be fun to try, but it's simply the wrong tool for the job.  Larry  Don't disagree on the wrong tool for the job with the M8. I still have to talk to the client and find out what his needs are to make a decision if i even need this. This guy makes custom handguns that are supposedly like the best thing you can buy, but if I have to get into the parts than maybe get the 60 or 100 macro for the DMR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 3, 2007 Share #11 Â Posted March 3, 2007 Sorry, yes, the macro elmar image is 1/3 life size, so 1:3, not 3:1 as I said. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 3, 2007 Share #12 Â Posted March 3, 2007 The 90/4 Macro only achieves 1:3 with the adapter:Â Leica Camera AG - Photography - LEICA MACRO-ELMAR-M 90 mm f/4 Â Guy, the best option by far is the Apo-100/2.8 Macro. Did you really sell yours? Â Â Yes a awhile back. It kills me when I sell stuff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejd Posted March 3, 2007 Share #13 Â Posted March 3, 2007 If it is a product shoot, with a static object to photograph, indoors, why not a visoflex? Actually you can put the macro elmar m 90 on the front of the visoflex and get ratios of 1:4 to 1:2 roughly depending on whether you leave the lens collapsed or extended and how you set the focus. Â You can also put a leitz bellows between the visoflex and the lens to get a lot more magnification. Â And there's no need to have the macro elmar m lens. You could put a 75 or 90 or indeed any lens on the visoflex or viso+bellows for close-ups. The shorter the focal length the greater the magnification (but also the shorter the distance from lens to object). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted March 3, 2007 Share #14 Â Posted March 3, 2007 Guy, Â Go with the 100, you'll appreciate the greater working distance. Â Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted March 3, 2007 Share #15 Â Posted March 3, 2007 Macro with a rangefinder, when you own a DMR? Â If you're gonna get a loaner, consider the R100/2.8 and the 1to1 atachment. Â Or a Macro Adapter R for 3 cam R lenses ... There's one on e-bay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 3, 2007 Share #16 Â Posted March 3, 2007 LOL you know me Marc i am one sick guy. Issue is was trying to avoid spending 1500 on a 100 macro for limited use. I may rent or borrow one for the day. This job is not paying a ton of money so was trying to do this one cheaply. We all need to make a profit. LOL Â Interesting Photomark here in town actually rents Leica gear. i rented a R9 when mine went in for repair, like 35 dollars a day which is cheap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
harmsr Posted March 3, 2007 Share #17  Posted March 3, 2007 Guy,  I just did a bunch of product photography of exactly that. (custom handguns)  The M8 is the wrong tool.  I ended up using my D200 with Nikon 60 / 2.8 Macro and Zeiss 50 / 1.4 for the "environmental" shots.  Linda loaned me the DMR and 100 Macro. I also used this combo a lot. The shots from the DMR and 100 Macro COMPLETELY blew the Nikon out of the water. You won't need the 1:1 Elpro either for this work. The 1:2 reproduction ration of that lens works out just fine.  Call Linda and see if you can borrow the 100 Macro for a couple of days. Once Leica has a new digital R solution, that lens is a MUST BUY for me.  Ray  P.S.: I ended up going with the ProPhoto compacts "R" (600 W specials with the pocket wizard built in). They are working great. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
harmsr Posted March 3, 2007 Share #18 Â Posted March 3, 2007 PS. Â Photomark rents the R9, but not the DMR and their lens selection is only two of the zooms (35-70 / 80-200). I checked there first. Â Linda was very nice in loaning me the gear. Â Best, Â Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_tanaka Posted March 3, 2007 Share #19 Â Posted March 3, 2007 Guy: As you can see, there have been some work-arounds for macro photography with an M. Some rather elegant, most rather kludgy. Â The bald fact is that macro photography is really outside the design spec for rangefinder cameras, particularly at anything like a professional level. This is in the ready realm of the slr / dslr. Â Right tool for the right job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek Posted March 3, 2007 Share #20  Posted March 3, 2007 If it is a product shoot, with a static object to photograph, indoors, why not a visoflex? Actually you can put the macro elmar m 90 on the front of the visoflex and get ratios of 1:4 to 1:2 roughly depending on whether you leave the lens collapsed or extended and how you set the focus. You can also put a leitz bellows between the visoflex and the lens to get a lot more magnification.  And there's no need to have the macro elmar m lens. You could put a 75 or 90 or indeed any lens on the visoflex or viso+bellows for close-ups. The shorter the focal length the greater the magnification (but also the shorter the distance from lens to object).  Yes Visoflex III & optional bellows. I got both on ebay in good condition. I have only one lens 2.8/28 ASPH currently, soooo .. 1) 28 mm very, very short, 2) this lens is *not* build to make sharp pics in 5 .. 10 cm in front of the lens (and you can easily see it), and 3) somehow dark viewer-pic.  Now, 4/90 (, 2.8/50 I guess), and others are build to be sharp on short distances in front of the lens. (More symetric lens construction, e.g. dual gauss .. like 2.0/50)  My 2 c.  Svend Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.